Currently there's quite a heated discussion going on around GitHub based on the placement of slider values on EE cycle rate option. As most of the users might know, new negative slider values for overclocking the EE was recently merged to the Master branch. (#816)

While this was a really good addition to the EE Cyclerate slider and also has a probability to be a potential alternative fix for timing issues (#82) , this did also introduce few irregularities on the GUI side from an user perspective.

The irregularities are that most of the users might expect the values +1 , +2 to overclock and conversely the negative equivalents to underclock the Emotion Engine's Clock speed. ( most likely the natural assumption by new users of the Emulator ) which conflicts with current slider since it actually does the opposite of what the new users might have expected it to do.

Whereas, Regular users of the emulator might have got accustomed to the positive values for the underclock and would naturally expect the negative equivalents to be an option for Overclocking.

The following Poll has been made on intention to find out the consensus among the users regarding the placement of the slider value functions. also please try to provide logical reasons for choosing any of the following options on the Poll , Thanks

Some notable quotes from users of PCSX2 :-

willkuer Wrote:I am no friend of inverting the slider btw. To change an existing feature into the opposite is a usability crime. At least for a 'short' time. I dont see the point why overclocking needs to be to the right. Sure the emulated 'clock rate' increases with overclocking. But the time period between events is decreased and the unlocked fps are decreased (due to cpu limitations). To define one direction as the one and only truth is not possible here.

blackbird Wrote:I for one would like it to be inverted. Dolphin already has it like this and it makes lot more sense.

We're supposed to be working as a team, if we aren't helping and suggesting things to each other, we aren't working as a team.
- Refraction

I vote to invert it. To me it is intuitive that the rightmost value would make the EE go faster.

Slightly off-topic but still about "bad" GUI design:
I argue that the GSdx Software mode "Extra rendering threads" option is bad design.
How many times have the regulars here had to explain that it should be set to "the number of cores of your processor, minus one"?
Because of this, I believe renaming it to "Rendering threads" and setting the minimum to 1 would be better.

(11-06-2015, 07:45 PM).r5 Wrote: How many times have the regulars here had to explain that it should be set to "the number of cores of your processor, minus one"?
Because of this, I believe renaming it to "Rendering threads" and setting the minimum to 1 would be better.

But that would mean it's using 2 threads, it is extra rendering threads over the main thread we would have to recode it so the gs plugin takes that value -1

I think the problem here is that it is in the speedhacks section. Increasing something in the speedhacks section shouldnt yield lower speed.

If you want to have a slider manipulating the clock rate put it into the ee tab and not in the speedhacks section.

Using lower than normal values here really means less vsyncs. And thats exactly what i would expect.

What i said about the usability crime is that everybody would expect after using 0.9.8, 1.0, 1.2.1 that increasing the ee slider one tick is the best for his athlon x2. At least between the stable revision where it was introduced up to the next stable release we will have confusion.